SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Guj) 199

R.A.MEHTA, P.R.GOKULAKRISHNAN
T. R. MISHRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: J.M.THAKAR, MAHESH C.BHATT, V.S.MANKAD

P. R. GOKULAKRISHNAN, R. A. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a public interest Litigation by the appellants who are legal practitioners and they are supported by respondents Nos. 4 to 20 who are Labour Unions They are all practising before the Labour Courts in Gujarat They are challenging the transfers of Labour Court Judges by the Government According to them this power of transfer control and superintendence over the labour judiciary is vested in the High Court under Arts 235 and 227 of the Constitution and therefore these transfers of 11 Labour Judge by the impugned order dated 28/06/1984 Annexure A to the petition are without any authority or competence They have also challenged the constitutional validity of Sec. 9 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act 1946 under which the State Government has the power to constitute Labour Courts and to appoint persons having qualifications specified in sub-sec. (2) to Sec. 9. The said Section reads as follows9 Labour Court - (1) the State Government shall by notification in the Official Gazette Constitute one or more Labour Courts having jurisdiction in such local areas as may be specified In such notification and shall appoint persons having the qua




































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top